STATE OF KERALA Vs. RAJAYYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused in this case, four in number, who are husband of deceased Sanalkumari, her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law respectively, were charged with offence punishable under Section 304-B read with Section 34 of the Penal Code. Learned Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram, who tried the case as SC 210 of 1989, acquitted all the accused as per his judgment dated 21-3-1991. State has preferred Crl. A. 382 of 1991 challenging the said acquittal. PW-1, mother of deceased Sanalkumari, has preferred Cri. R. P. 600 of 1991 questioning the correctness of the acquittal. We heard learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing in these cases in extenso, we are disposing of the appeal and the criminal revision petition by this common judgment.

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is as follows : First accused is a graduate working as Police Constable. Second accused is his mother and accused 3 and 4 his sisters. First accused married Sanalkumari, daughter of PWs. 1 and 2, on 7-6-1984. At the time of the marriage, accused obtained by way of dowry 20 cents of land belonging to PWs. 1 and 2 and gold ornaments worth 20 sovereigns. The document for the 20 cents of land was executed in favour of the first accused on the date of betrothal. Marriage was performed in the Malankara Syrian Catholic Church Kangiramkulam. Even on the third day after marriage, first accused started expressing dissatisfaction on the quantum of dowry. He started construction of a pucca building in his father's property, availing a loan. When the loan amount was exhausted, he approached PWs. 1 and 2 for the balance dowry amount. PWs. 1 and 2 were unable to meet the demand. Accused sold almost all the ornaments of Sanalkumari and the amount was utilised for completing the building. Since PWs. 1 and 2 failed to pay the dowry amount, accused harassed and behaved cruelly towards Sanalkumari. In the meantime, she became pregnant. She was not allowed to remain in her parent's house immediately prior to the delivery. When she was admitted in the hospital in connection with the delivery, that fact was not intimated to her parents. Sanalkumari gave birth to a female child on 6-7-1985. As a result of the mental torture during pregnancy, she developed puerperal psychosis. She was under the treatment of PW-12. Finding the pitiable predicament of Sanalkumari, PWs. 1 and 2 gave Rs. 50,000.00 in cash and obtained a release of the 20 cents transferred in the name of the first accused. Thereafter first accused put forth a demand for an additional amount of Rs. 10,000.00 and 3 sovereigns. As that demand was not immediately conceded by PWs. 1 and 2, accused continued to torture and harass Sanalkumari. About two weeks prior to the death of Sanalkumari, PWs. 1 and 2 expressed their inability to pay anything more as sthreedhanam. Thereafter accused behaved cruelly towards Sanalkumari. When the torture became unbearable, she committed suicide by jumping into the well in the house of the accused on 5-10-1987.

(3.) Body of Sanalkumari was lifted from the well by the Fire Force. PW-11, brother-in-law of first accused and husband of the third accused, lodged First Information Statement about the incident at 3.00 a.m. on 6-10-1987. It was recorded by PW-15. On the basis of that, Crime 166/1987 of Vishinjam Police Station was registered as 'unnatural death'. PW-2 complained that the death of Sanalkumari was a dowry death. Thereupon the investigation of the case was entrusted with the Crime Branch CID. PW-20, the Divisional Inspector of CB CID, conducted the investigation. After completing the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against accused 1 and 2 for offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Penal Code. PW-2 moved this Court by filling Crl. M. C. 776/1989 questioning the action of PW-20 in removing accused 3 and 4 from the array of parties. This Court disposed of that Crl. M. C. by directing the investigating officer to file chargesheet against all, the accused persons under Section 304-B read with Section 34 of the Penal Code. Accordingly, PW-20 laid charge for the said offence against all the accused. Learned Sessions Judge framed charges against all the accused for offences under Section 304-B and 498-A read with Section 34 of the Penal Code.